Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

jayachandran (advocate)     07 August 2010

JUSTICE OR INJUSTICE

The Sessions Court, Shivapuri, the trial court, found 8 accused viz, Sughar Singh, Laxman,Onkar,Ramesh,Bhoja,Raghubir, Puran and Balbir, guilty of the offence of murder and sentenced them to Life imprisonment. The said 8 accused filed appeal before the High  Court, M.P. The Gwalior Bench acquitted all of them as prosecution had not proved the case beyond doubt. State filed appeal to Supreme Court against the acquittal. For some reason, the respondents in the appeal were only the first 4 of the 8 accused.ie, A1 to A4.The remaining A5 to A8 were not made as parties in the appeal by the State before MP High Court.

By a lengthy judgment, the Supreme court Bench consisting of Dr.Arijit Pasayat, C,K,Thakker and L.S.Panta allowd the appeal on 7-11-2008. This judgment is reported in AIR 2009 SC 586=2008(15)SCC 442. The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, convicted the accused and further directed them to undergo rigorous imprisonment. The State swung into action and put all the accused A1 to A8 in jail.

A5 to A8 moved the Supreme Court by way of review stating that they were not parties to the appeal before the Supreme Court and not heard but still found guilty. The review petition was dismissed.

The parties A5 to A8 filed and moved a Curative Petition . Four judges of the Supreme Court by order dated 9-2-2010, recalled the order dated 7-11-2008 and feculiarly directed release of A1 to A4 and not a word about A5 to A8. Again A5o A8 shocked about this, again filed a modification petition. Fortunately it was not dismissed. When an urgent mention was made, the request was rejected by a Bench presided over By the Former CJI Sri  K.G.Balakrishnan, presently the Chairman of National Human Rights Commission. The modification petition was directd to be listed a fortnight lter in May,2010.

The modification petition was allowed. At last the A5 to A8 were also released from jail.

It is learnt that the A5 to A8 filed petitions claiming compensation - which is under debate and finality not reached- as to who is to bell the cat.

Who is responsible for all these?

Where is the Constitutional guarantee of liberty and life?

Who is to safeguard them?

Is  it because of hurred justice?

Is it the fault of the prosecutors in Supreme court ?

JUSTICE OR INJUSTICE-----A LOSS IS A LOSS!!!!!



Learning

 1 Replies

K.C.Suresh (Advocate)     07 August 2010

Dear Jayachandran

I repeat you said  : For some reason, the respondents in the appeal were only the first 4 of the 8 accused.ie, A1 to A4.The remaining A5 to A8 were not made as parties in the appeal by the State before MP High Court.

By a lengthy judgment, the Supreme court Bench consisting of Dr.Arijit Pasayat, C,K,Thakker and L.S.Panta allowd the appeal on 7-11-2008. This judgment is reported in AIR 2009 SC 586=2008(15)SCC 442. The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, convicted the accused and further directed them to undergo rigorous imprisonment. The State swung into action and put all the accused A1 to A8 in jail.

The SC is seen errored. Why it ws not retified at the earliest is not forth coming.

Rgds


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register